Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29764462›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2018

Empirical and conceptual investigation of de-implementation of low-value care from professional and health care system perspectives: a study protocol.

Henna Hasson, Per Nilsen, Hanna Augustsson, Ulrica von Thiele Schwarz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Uncertainty as a critical determinant of antibiotic prescribing in patients with an asthma exacerbation: a qualitative study.The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Why Not? Persuading Clinicians to Reduce Overuse.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Henna HassonProcome research group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. henna.hasson@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-3827-6841
Per NilsenDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Community Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Hanna AugustssonProcome research group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ulrica von Thiele SchwarzProcome research group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, SE 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

Forskningsrådet för Arbetsliv och Socialvetenskap 2017-00449
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA considerable proportion of interventions provided to patients lacks evidence of their effectiveness. This implies that patients may receive ineffective, unnecessary, or even harmful care. Thus, in addition to implementing evidence-based practices, there is also a need to abandon interventions that are not based on best evidence, i.e., low-value care. However, research on de-implementation is limited, and there is a lack of knowledge about how effective de-implementation processes should be carried out. The aim of this project is to explore the phenomenon of the de-implementation of low-value health care practices from the perspective of professionals and the health care system.

methodsTheories of habits and developmental learning in combination with theories of organizational alignment will be used. The project's work will be conducted in five steps. Step 1 is a scoping review of the literature, and Step 2 has an explorative design involving interviews with health care stakeholders. Step 3 has a prospective design in which workplaces and professionals are shadowed during an ongoing de-implementation. In Step 4, a conceptual framework for de-implementation will be developed based on the previous steps. In Step 5, strategies for de-implementation are identified using a co-design approach. DISCUSSION: This project contributes new knowledge to implementation science consisting of empirical data, a conceptual framework, and strategy suggestions on de-implementation of low-value care. The professionals' perspectives will be highlighted, including insights into how they make decisions, handle de-implementation in daily practice, and what consequences it has on their work. Furthermore, the health care system perspective will be considered and new knowledge on how de-implementation can be understood across health care system levels will be obtained. The theories of habits and developmental learning can also offer insights into how context triggers and reinforces certain behaviors and how factors at the individual and the organizational levels interact. The project employs a solution-oriented perspective by developing a framework for de-implementation of low-value practices and suggesting practical strategies to improve de-implementation processes at all levels of the health care system. The framework and the strategies can thereafter be evaluated for their validity and impact in future studies.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareQuality of Health CareHumansLearningProspective StudiesAbandonDe-adoptionDecrease useDisinvestmentHabitsIneffectiveUnlearning

Identifiers

PMID29764462
PMCPMC5952615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.